Posted on 06/19/2014 3:09:38 PM PDT by detective
OK, OK. To the Bush family, and particularly to former two-term Florida Gov. Jeb Bush: Don't worry. Let me start, up front, by saying: I would never vote for Jeb Bush for president. He is way too conservative for me.
Now that that's over with, I think Bush is a really good guy -- a good person, good father, good husband, good brother (to my Yale College friend, two-term President George W. Bush) and good son to his great, great dad, former President George H.W. Bush.
Jeb Bush's positions on two issues, in my view, make him formidable against a Democratic presidential candidate in 2016: education reform and immigration policy.
(Excerpt) Read more at huffingtonpost.com ...
Yes.
That particular poster has demonstrated more than a few times that he isn’t really capable of understanding anything at all.
For whatever reason, people such as this are loyal to a party that isn’t loyal to them at all.
He has been divided and conquered.
He is so loyal to party that he, like Rooster Redux (on another thread) must LIE, must essentially BEAR FALSE WITNESS, to "debate" his position. Truth is on OUR side, so they have to lie via "new math" to justify their decision to vote FOR leftists and collectivists.
Just FYI, Rooster is on another thread stating REPEATEDLY as "fact" that Obama was "my guy" and that I literally "put him in office." The irony is that HE, Rooster, is the one who voted FOR a collectivist leftist; I voted FOR a limited government conservative. Both Rooster's and my candidates lost, Obama won, and Rooster not only blames me, he says Obama was "my guy" and that I PUT him in office. Whereas the truth is that IF Romney had won and was advancing all the evil of the left, if I blamed Rooster by saying, "Hey, Romney was YOUR guy, you put him in office, it's your fault," I would be telling the truth because Rooster voted for Romney and urged others to vote for Romney.
I, on the other hand, did not vote for Obama nor did I encourage others to vote for Obama, but self-deceiving liars like ROCKLOBSTER and Rooster have convinced themselves of the mathematical and physical fantasy that if you didn't vote for Romney, it was "the same" as voting for Obama, a totally, one hundred percent emotion-based conclusion based on pretend "truth."
And the chickens are coming home to roost because when you ignore reality, it comes back to kick you in the butt. Voting FOR Republican leftists on the false pretense that you were voting "against" Democrat leftism, is ignoring the physical reality that the only thing that matters is what you vote FOR. That truth is coming home to roost in what the Republican party has become, and these clowns are too PROUD to face their own error.
This is what you call bearing false witness...a lie.
Shame on you.
Chris — amazing! Rooster lives in “New Math” land.
You have to lie to justify your bad math and wrong vote.
It's not that they are merely entitled to their opinion.
You say they are lying to justify their bad math. Is that correct?
Lobster and Rooster (interesting assortment of critters), it should be a LITMUS TEST for you.
If to justify your argument you must resort to mathematical sophistry like "voting against" assigning an imaginary -1 value to a plainly binary vote, or if you have to outright lie ("Obama was your guy," "you [willfully] put him in office," that's a RED FLAG that you're on the wrong side of the issue.
Google "spoiler effect" and you might understand the position that voting for a spoiler candidate is, in essence, strengthening another main candidate...in this case Obama.
This is not "new math" as you so insultingly claim but game theory.
You may not agree with it, but calling those who understand it "liars" is inappropriate and looks bad for FR.
When you say Obama was "my guy" and that I "put him in office," you knowingly assign intent in the wrong place, with anger and bitterness.
That is your lie.
And that reality comes back to you, it is coming back to the GOP, because WE -- I am included -- lied to ourselves when we voted for the likes of Meg Whitman (a Romney leftist) and John McCain. We wanted to defy reality -- we were voting FOR leftists, constantly moving the party left, but we told ourselves the only thing that mattered was what we were voting "against." Ooops. We have lied to ourselves and we are now reaping the consequences of having pretended voting for liberals was voting "against" liberalism.
All I can say is that some of us have woken up to this; many others such as yourself are still slumbering.
When you say Obama was "my guy" and that I "put him in office," you knowingly assign intent in the wrong place, with anger and bitterness.
That is your lie.
And that reality comes back to you, it is coming back to the GOP, because WE -- I am included -- lied to ourselves when we voted for the likes of Meg Whitman (a Romney leftist) and John McCain. We wanted to defy reality -- we were voting FOR leftists, constantly moving the party left, but we told ourselves the only thing that mattered was what we were voting "against." Ooops. We have lied to ourselves and we are now reaping the consequences of having pretended voting for liberals was voting "against" liberalism.
All I can say is that some of us have woken up to this; many others such as yourself are still slumbering.
I apologize for saying that, it was wrong of me.
That said, if Hillary Clinton had run as a write-in or third party, she and her supporters would have been called spoilers by the Obama crowd and accused of handing the election to Romney.
And considering that she was the weaker candidate, they would be right.
Sometimes during a heated debate, I get a little excited and say things that might be inappropriate. Sorry when and if I did so last night.
You lie. I am very civil in telling you this -- where you see me as not remaining "civil in discussion" is beyond me.
See post #131.
Truth is knowledge, and knowledge is power.
I won’t stay home, I’ll vote against him!
Thx.:-)
That's as may be.
The on-the-ground physical hard truth is that a vote is binary, 0 or 1. Any other mathematical quality we assign to it is imagined, projected, assumed in error, whatever.
It is FOR, or it is absent. When I or anyone else acts on a voting strategy centered around an imaginary function, "against," of course the results we seek in following such a strategy, remain zero.
I’m not that gracious or classy. I’m a realist. And I’m good with it. The absolute liberal crap that spewed from his mouth last night as well as the prior several days pretty much tells the site what he is.
ESPECIALLY his personal attacks on Tom that were wholly unwarranted and undeserved.
And mark my words, this apology will be forgotten the next time the subject comes up and he returns to form. So I bookmarked it and will be posting it the next time, and every time thereafter asking Rooster if he was lying about how ‘sorry’ he really was.
Actions speak louder than internet apologies.
It essentially boils down to if one chooses the lesser of two evils, then one has chosen evil.
I can’t do this anymore, I’m just not going to play this game anymore.
If a upstart candidate can convince me that he is a conservative, and that he is not lying, then I will consider voting for that person.
If an incumbent has shown that he is not conservative and does not represent me and the things I hold important, then I am not going to vote for that person.
Arguing that person X is not person Y is not enough for me any longer. I need a positive reason to support a person, not a negative reason.
And by not voting for a person, that does not mean I am voting for that person’s opponent. What it means is I didn’t vote because there was no one for me to vote for.
If other people elect that person’s opponent, then that is their choice, not mine.
I am no longer loyal to the GOP, which is a party that is loyal to no one and nothing except government.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.